Posted on 11/05/2011 12:58:45 AM PDT by Kevmo
Well, then I wish you the best in your hunt for the truth.
Silly me, I presumed that the machine would come with shielding.And what is the appropriate amount of shielding for a device that operates on "unknown nuclear reactions", using a "secret" device?
That must mean LENR is a fraud.
I wonder if it has the self destruct mechanism Rossi promised and how that would be affected by radiation.
I bet they don't exist.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/backroom/2800058/posts?page=55#55
To: Moonman62
It appears that a relatively innocuous post responding to you was pulled.
This means I have nothing more to say to you about LENR. Bye.
55 posted on Sunday, October 30, 2011 4:41:07 PM by Kevmo (Caveat lurkor pro se ipso judicatis: Let the lurker decide for himself)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies | Report Abuse]
Please post the source for the claim of gammas, as it is highly significant.Here is a report about radiation detected during the January 2011 dog & pony show.
You'll notice that the results were inconsistent, and, as usual for Rossi, the testing configuration was useless. The person detecting the radiation wasn't even the same room as the E-Cat when the radiation was detected, and had to rely on Rossi's word that it was the result of Rossi having just turned on the device.
I do recall reading in Rossi's notes from the latest test that there was no detectable radiation. Rossi has claimed in the past that the E-Cat does generate radiation, so that seems to be an inconsistency.
Notice that Rossi "objected vociferously" at one point to the observer trying to take an additional measurement. Presumably he was worried about his "secret" being revealed. Whether that secret is an amazing new process, or how he is faking this remains unclear.
It's fairly obvious from MANY experiments (not just Rossi) that CF doesn't follow the "traditional, well-established equations for this nuclear reaction"In that case, we have no idea what Rossi's device will or won't do. It could blow up and take the city of Bologna with it. It certainly wouldn't be acceptable for Rossi to be selling them to the public.
Rossi says "weak gammas" on the same energy order as x-rays., which don't take a gigantic amount of shielding.How would Rossi know? You've already stated that we have to throw away current theory (which you have repeatedly stated is "useless") to believe Rossi, so you can't use current theory to justify any other part of Rossi's device.
And, there again is that phrase "Rossi says". It's amazing how little there is to this story once you remove the parts that rely on "Rossi says".
If Rossi’s ecat were real, it would be a leap of many thousand fold (if not millions) increase over the best result that anyone had ever got.And yet he's trying to sell them as medium-sized boilers.
I can't help but think that if Rossi were Thomas Edison, he would have invented the incandescent lightbulb, turned it into a production-ready device...
And then sold it as the heart of the "Easy Bake Oven".
Clearly, Rossi DOES care about the skeptics, enough to exclude researchers from taking their own measurements. Why? Because Rossi is running a scam.
Did any of the people you compare to Rossi buy degrees from diploma mills?
Rossi did. He is a liar.
No, the conclusion was that there were "no nuclear fingerprints" above 200KEV.
Excuse me....but you do not need theory to determine what a device will or won't do. Experimental data is all that is necessary. Theory is nice to have, but not essential.
"How would Rossi know? You've already stated that we have to throw away current theory (which you have repeatedly stated is "useless") to believe Rossi, so you can't use current theory to justify any other part of Rossi's device."
Perhaps because he has made measurements of the device operating under many different sets of conditions??
The 200 figure was in regard to background radiation, I believe. Below is an exact quote of what follows that.
“Thus at present having found no nuclear reaction fingerprints, further
investigations are indeed needed to identify the energy production process.”
Now, back to the original point ~ someone said a "bathroom scale" was being used to weigh materials that went into the make up of the reactor.
No evidence was provided that the device was, in fact, a bathroom scale, but modern technology in the field of force measurement is such that the difference between a high tech scale with great precision is not very great. So what looked like a bathroom scale to you could have been just a part of a scale installation. These devices simply don't have to sweat the small stuff like "points" these days ~ mostly because they don't need moving parts.
Someone should come up with a picture of the device you think is a bathroom scale though. Then, I'll show you a picture of my alarm clock.
But this has to be a technology revolution rivaling the Industrial Revolution in size and scope, no?
When can we expect to see 10% of the world’s electric power coming from this sort of power generating facility?
When will it be 50%?
When will it be over 90%?
Any predictions?
Any measurement of "background radiation" would be in "counts per unit time". A unit of measure that says "200KEV" refers to the energy of the photons of the measured radiation (or, in this case, the lower energy limit of the radiations measured...probably due to limitations of the specific detector used).
It's been a long time since I used a NaI(Tl) scintillation detector, and I don't recall exactly what the limits are on photon energy range that are measurable.
Whether it was “counts per unit time” or lumps of sugar per teacup, that is what is in the link you provided and their statement.
No gamma radiation fingerprints, etc.
Excuse me....but you do not need theory to determine what a device will or won't do. Experimental data is all that is necessary. Theory is nice to have, but not essential.Thanks for bringing up this argument again.
I agree that a good experiment beats a good theory. But it's not a good experiment unless it's repeatable. And by repeatable, I don't mean that Rossi keeps doing his dog & pony shows. Repeatable means that other researchers, using different test equipment at different labs have repeated the experiment and gotten comparable results. See the work being done regarding CERN's claim of super-luminal neutrinos to see how it's supposed to be done.
Rossi isn't doing science. We certainly can't trust him, and him alone, to guarantee that this thing works and works safely. I'm not aware of any technology that can kill people (especially innocent bystanders) which society allows to be "self certified" by the guy putting it together. I've never built an aircraft, but I do know that it must be examined and certified before it can legally be flown. Even if the person building the plane is qualified to certify other builder's planes, he still cannot certify his own. The important part is to have a disinterested expert double-check the work. Rossi hasn't done anything remotely like that.
Perhaps because he has made measurements of the device operating under many different sets of conditions??Perhaps he has. Perhaps he hasn't. This is another "Rossi said" moments that you are willing to implicitly trust. Given Rossi's shady past, the parts of this story we know are phony (his degrees, the nonexistent people on his so called Board of Advisors, the Florida factory that turned out to be a 5th floor apartment, and so on ad nauseum), it's ridiculous to trust Rossi at all.
Until we get disinterested experts to duplicate Rossi's results (which could have happened at any time in the last year if Rossi hadn't prevented it), Rossi continues to look less like Thomas Edison and more like P. T. Barnum.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.